Here are links to low-cost online college, including massive open online courses, or MOOCs at top colleges.

Even if the student is not enrolled, studying the subject will give an immense advantage when taking it “for the first time” in class.

Success in online study requires self-motivation and/or home schooling help. Only about 10% of students complete the online course work because most lack the self-discipline to do the work without being disciplined by a teacher. Those who do complete the coursework get the education for free and also demonstrate that they are very self-disciplined.

In my opinion, this resource will eventually change the world by providing a top-notch education to the most intelligent and motivated around the entire world, even if they are too poor to go to college.

Please use this information to your own advantage. Those of you with several children may be able to get a leg up on college for them without spending much, if any, precious family resources. Adults can advance their careers by studying independently.

In my opinion, this resource will eventually change the world by providing a top-notch education to the most intelligent and motivated around the entire world, even if they are too poor to go to college.

It can provide good technical education, which for many careers is sufficient. There is going to be a two-tier system, where those that can afford to attend a real college will have access to a much different education which often will be better.

>>>It can provide good technical education, which for many careers is sufficient. There is going to be a two-tier system, where those that can afford to attend a real college will have access to a much different education which often will be better.<<<

I can think of NO subject taught in college currently that a sufficiently motivated person could not learn on their own at least to the level equivalent of a BS of BA degree, by purchasing used text books, reading online articles, working problems on their own, etc.

What they would miss is:

1. A "certification" that they have learned the information and skills.2. The opportunity to develop interpersonal skills specific to the degree, although this can be done without formal "school" as well.3. The opportunity provided to "practice" the profession. For example lab courses and practical experiences through internships and co-op programs. Although, again, some of this can be replicated outside of the university as well.

I seem to recall that you could at one time apprentice to become a lawyer, i.e. just work with a lawyer as his help and be trained by him, without ever getting a law degree. After enough time and with the right recommendations you could take the bar and be licensed. Not sure if that is possible any more.

Engineering and surveying are other fields where interns and apprentices used to be common, not so much anymore.

However, while the ability of someone to get this type of education on their own exists. In practice what company would hire such a person over one with a degree from a recognized school? For that reason I am not sure that these courses will replace colleges and universities so much as be a supplement for students.

1. A "certification" that they have learned the information and skills.2. The opportunity to develop interpersonal skills specific to the degree, although this can be done without formal "school" as well.3. The opportunity provided to "practice" the profession. For example lab courses and practical experiences through internships and co-op programs. Although, again, some of this can be replicated outside of the university as well.

They would also miss the opportunity to develop non-educational interpersonal skills. There is more to college than taking a course and passing tests.

Engineering and surveying are other fields where interns and apprentices used to be common, not so much anymore.

At least for engineering, interning as an addition to college is routine.

However, while the ability of someone to get this type of education on their own exists. In practice what company would hire such a person over one with a degree from a recognized school? For that reason I am not sure that these courses will replace colleges and universities so much as be a supplement for students.

It was more common to be able to start with a company in a manufacturing position and move into technical positions. With the manufacturing jobs mostly gone, there are no transitional positions. A degree is required for entry.

The opportunity to develop interpersonal skills specific to the degree

Who you know does matter. The social connections made during college can make a difference. A CEO of one company where I worked was only CEO because of his connections.

Please use this information to your own advantage. Those of you with several children may be able to get a leg up on college for them without spending much, if any, precious family resources. Adults can advance their careers by studying independently.

My son's college showed up on this list -- Umass Boston. He's very happy with it and I'm happy his grandmother and I can write a check and be done with it. No student loan here!

I can think of NO subject taught in college currently that a sufficiently motivated person could not learn on their own at least to the level equivalent of a BS of BA degree, by purchasing used text books, reading online articles, working problems on their own, etc.

While the statement is true, is it really relevant? I've had the good fortune to know some very smart and very motivated people. The most amazing was the 18 year old guy who took 25 units a quarter at a CA University (12-15 was a full load). He mostly studied on his own then passed the final.

Most students, especially teenagers and young adults, neither have the talent or self-discipline to do what he did. Schools have to work for the vast majority of students, not just the top 0.001%.

I can think of NO subject taught in college currently that a sufficiently motivated person could not learn on their own at least to the level equivalent of a BS of BA degree, by purchasing used text books, reading online articles, working problems on their own, etc.

I'm not sure that's completely true. For example, writing. You can read books about writing, you can read examples of good writing, but there really isn't a substitute for having someone read your writing and critique your work. I don't just mean fiction writing - in my current job I do technical and scientific writing, and there is a definite skill to writing clearly and having the words flow so the reader can understand it better. I learned that skill by having good teachers who critiqued my work and explained how to make my writing tighter and cleaner. The advocates of online courses say that they can accomplish this with forum postings, so students grade each other, but having one bad, inexperienced writer critiquing another bad, inexperienced writer only goes so far - you really need someone with experience and teaching skill to do this.

Even in technical skills, sometimes having someone help you one-on-one is invaluable. When I was an undergrad, I was really struggling with organic chemistry. I read the books, I worked through the sample problems, I attended all the classes, but there were a couple of concepts that I just couldn't figure out. I had a really good professor who was able to sit down with me and explain things in a different way, a way that "clicked" for me in a way that the lectures and textbooks did not. And that made all the difference. Unfortunately, not everyone is good at this - I was a teaching assistant when I was in graduate school and I'm afraid I wasn't able to answer my students' questions as effectively. If they didn't understand my explanation, I had no idea how to convey the information differently except to say it slower and louder. That doesn't solve the fundamental problem.

That doesn't mean you can't teach classes online - I telework and I'm able to interact with my coworkers through my computer - but there's no real way to get that one-on-one interaction if you have one professor and 10,000 students. It could make those interactions more efficient, so you can reduce the cost of college, but if we completely eliminate interactions between professors and students, then I think we've lost a crucial part of education.

I also found it ironic that the person who wrote the NY Times article about getting an online education is now a professor at a "regular" college.

Online courses do have their place, but they could ever replace interaction with instructors, other students, and staff that affords education and networking opportunities. Complete online or self directed education means you are learning in a vacuum. You need to be in the presence of other people in a learning environment in order to get nuances, find out what you don't know, and be given help and advice when you don't realize you need help and advice. A person alone without that support gets a poor education.

I think many of the scientific subjects you'd have a hard time doing on your own. Chemistry lab, for example - I don't happen to have one in my home - do you? Materials also - I remember designing, mixing and breaking concrete cores in my materials lab - again, cannot do that at home and no GC is going to let me just experiment with weirdo admixtures on their dime for the heck of it.

Languages too I think yes, you can do on your own, but it is far better to do them in a school where spoken practice can be had.

All in all I think structured schooling offers a better environment for learning than self-study, although I'm a big fan of self-study as well.

All in all I think structured schooling offers a better environment for learning than self-study, although I'm a big fan of self-study as well.

There's also the give and take in college classrooms that can broaden a student's understanding of an issue. Sometimes the other students in a class have more knowledge and understanding of a particular issue, and can contribute that understanding to the others. I've read that some professors like the evening classes because the students are more likely to be grown and have real life experience in some field. Sometimes other students are simply able to articulate a concept in a way that helps other students.

So, having said that, my oldest niece teaches math in a community college in California. She lives in Massachusetts, and teaches on-line. She meets with the students a couple of times a year, and works a regular day schedule at her computer.

So yes, there are some good points in on=line classes, and some bad points. Like many other matters in life, people need to weigh the pros and cons. If all you want is access to the knowledge, there are colleges and universities that have their material online. MIT is a noted example. You don't take tests, you don't get papers graded, you can't ask professors for their time. But you can access the lectures and other material.

But I would say that in getting a 2-year technical college degree and in the classes I took later, I learned MUCH more through being in class than I could have online, even in the classes where teaching online might have worked. Some of what we had to learn was hands-on, and you had to be there.

All in all I think structured schooling offers a better environment for learning than self-study, although I'm a big fan of self-study as well.

Me, too. And I think where these online resources really come into play is for personal enrichment. Despite my liberal arts education, I realized a couple of years ago that my knowledge of history was extremely poor in a lot of areas. Using the Open Yale courses and other things available on I-tunes, I've been able to work on that. Right now I'm really enjoying the Open Yale course on the Early Middle Ages, and while I'm not taking the tests or writing papers, I am listening to the lectures and have read a couple (not all) the recommended texts. I also did one a while back on the Roman Empire (can't recall if that was Yale or not) and it was excellent. It relied a lot on the Suetonius text, which was even available for free on Project Gutenberg.

The great thing about any education (and I credit expecially the liberal arts for doing this for me) is to make a person interested in things and go out and seek further education and knowledge on their own. What I like about being at this point in my life I can learn the stuff that I'm personally interested in, and not have to worry about "Do I have enough credits in my science sequence" like I did as an undergrad.

I suppose that the stuff I'm learning right now won't ever get me a better job, but it's fun, and I enjoy it, and maybe I'm staving off Alzheimers.

I'm kind of a believer in education for the sake of education, not necessarily for a job. I suppose that's a hold over from being a liberal arts person, but I think there are definitely negatives to going to school to learn about X, because I'm going to get a job in X. That's great, and I'm sure you'll get a great job, but having a broad base of knowledge enriches my life in so many ways beyond the job. And I like that.

By the way, I learned in the Early Middle Ages course that Charlemagne worked very hard to increase education and knowledge in his time, based on the liberal arts as they were understood at that time.

I'm kind of a believer in education for the sake of education, not necessarily for a job. I suppose that's a hold over from being a liberal arts person, but I think there are definitely negatives to going to school to learn about X, because I'm going to get a job in X. That's great, and I'm sure you'll get a great job, but having a broad base of knowledge enriches my life in so many ways beyond the job. And I like that. I strongly agree with this.

It was my liberal arts undergrad education that gave me my base, and in large part charted my approach to learning. The architecture/engineering was an add-on, and although I love my field I am VERY happy I didn't do solely a technical education.

I'm kind of a believer in education for the sake of education, not necessarily for a job. I suppose that's a hold over from being a liberal arts person, but I think there are definitely negatives to going to school to learn about X, because I'm going to get a job in X. That's great, and I'm sure you'll get a great job, but having a broad base of knowledge enriches my life in so many ways beyond the job. And I like that.

No one is saying one can't pursue topics they find of interest life-long. But with (accredited) college education costs rising, and student loans non-dischargeable, it isn't cost effective for the masses to spend years studying topics that aren't related to necessary jobs society needs to fill. And someone could always minor in a subject they want to learn 'just because' while they major in a field that's related to jobs society needs. IMO it's a complete waste of education dollars K-12 if we're just going to have American college students studying libeeral arts, while we need to increase H1-B visas to fill the jobs in healthcare, tech, and sciences.

I can think of NO subject taught in college currently that a sufficiently motivated person could not learn on their own at least to the level equivalent of a BS of BA degree, by purchasing used text books, reading online articles, working problems on their own, etc.

I teach mathematics at a university. It is possible, I suppose, that a motivated student with access to some guidance (which most students do not have ready access to) to get some idea about the subject that a layman might consider the equivalent of a B.A.

I suppose.

I am not holding my breath to see a flood of such students however.

I find the (unstated but implied) notion that I bring no actual value to the students by being in the classroom both amusing and, at the same time, quite insulting.

IMO it's a complete waste of education dollars K-12 if we're just going to have American college students studying libeeral arts, while we need to increase H1-B visas to fill the jobs in healthcare, tech, and sciences.

Do you even know what the liberal arts are? Where the term comes from? Hint: Mathematics comprised 2 of the 7 original "liberal arts."

I can definitively state that I am a better architect, and a better communicator precisely BECAUSE of my liberal arts education.

I've had the chance to train and mentor hundreds of technical people over the years, and generally the better ones are the ones who have a broad educational background. The ones I have had the most difficulty training to communicate effectively and to expand their field of focus are those who come from the field or a technical degree and are without that background. As with anything, there are notable exceptions of course, but it has been a clear trend for me in working with junior people.

while we need to increase H1-B visas to fill the jobs in healthcare, tech, and sciences.

Actually, there's a lot of criticism about H1B visas that they really don't fill a labor shortage, because there really aren't labor shortages in most of the areas served by this type of visa. Rather, it's a way for employers to get cheaper labor.

But with (accredited) college education costs rising, and student loans non-dischargeable, it isn't cost effective for the masses to spend years studying topics that aren't related to necessary jobs society needs to fill.

But here's the thing: I don't know too many people to come out of college, regardless of what they studied, that are ready to hit the ground running in a career. Some, maybe, but not all. Most people don't graduate from college with their newly-minted engineering degree and start building skyscrapers and bridges.

I don't disagree with you--I think tuition levels seem high. But I disagree with this premise that the only way to get a college degree is to take out a ton of debt, which then reinforces the notion that a student has to get a great-paying job, or has to study for a high-paying career, to pay it back.

And this "picking the right career" thing is tricky at best. Who knows what they want to be when they're 18 or 19 years old? There's a tendency to pick what looks hot now--when I graduated in college in 1986, so many of my peers went to law school because it was the hot thing (and we were near DC). Lawyers are a dime a dozen, and practically trip over each other trying to get work, unless they're in a handful of the "right" firms or in the "right" areas of practice.

I think that partnerships between companies and schools are a good thing, and there should probably be more of them. I think companies need some "skin in the game" with respect to developing their people and keeping them. Too many companies want to hire someone with the perfect background to fit their particular niche so that they (the company) doesn't have to make an investment of time and resources to train them.

<I would say that in getting a 2-year technical college degree and in the classes I took later, I learned MUCH more through being in class than I could have online, even in the classes where teaching online might have worked. Some of what we had to learn was hands-on, and you had to be there.>

I completely agree that in many cases, for example my field of chemistry, hands-on experience is absolutely essential. It's possible to learn the theory online, but it could be dangerous to "learn" lab technique online and then work in an actual lab where manual dexterity and skill is needed.

I find the (unstated but implied) notion that I bring no actual value to the students by being in the classroom both amusing and, at the same time, quite insulting.

My daughter went to a very large NY City University for two years. She hated it. There was little to no interaction with her professors.She stayed for two years and then was accepted as a transfer student to a small liberal arts college where there was one professor for 7 students. She flourished in that environment. Of course, she is also extremely ambitious which counts for alot.My DH went to city and state colleges (relatively inexpensive) but he was very ambitious and did very well career wise.Obviously a key factor is both my daughters and their father are very hard working ambitious people.

IMO it's a complete waste of education dollars K-12 if we're just going to have American college students studying libeeral arts, while we need to increase H1-B visas to fill the jobs in healthcare, tech, and sciences.

Oldest daughter graduated 20 years ago from a small liberal arts college with a degree in Art History.She makes well over $100,000 a year. She never had a career that had anything to do with Art History either.

Oldest daughter graduated 20 years ago from a small liberal arts college with a degree in Art History.She makes well over $100,000 a year. She never had a career that had anything to do with Art History either.Ditto for me and many of my fellow art history compadres. Our fields range from architecture/construction (me) to museum exhibit design to marketing. Liberal arts is a great base for almost anything.

Oldest daughter graduated 20 years ago from a small liberal arts college with a degree in Art History.She makes well over $100,000 a year. She never had a career that had anything to do with Art History either.

20 years ago college costs were much lower compared to median household incomes of parents (and for most under 25, government expects parents to contribute some) and the tech industry was different where someone without a degree could get an entry-level programming job.

Times have changed. Education has to change with the times - but also society's expectation as a whole on what they're paying in educational tax dollars to educate the younger generation and what roles society needs to fill cannot be ignored.

Well, one of the questions I asked when I interviewed a new college grad for a job (in the computer science area) was "What courses outside of your major did you take that you liked?" I wanted to see if the candidate had some imagination and was able to talk about something more important than computer programming, like history or philosophy. The guy who had nothing but courses in math and physics did not get hired.

Of course most of the computer science programs they came from were really inadequate anyway. I never found anybody who could tell me how TCP/IP works, or who actually knew what a communications protocol was. And most of them had very little knowledge of programming. It made me wonder what was actually taught, if anything.

The fact is that an intelligent person can pick that stuff up pretty quickly, reading stuff by Knuth, and a C-language manual (or whatever else).

Oldest daughter graduated 20 years ago from a small liberal arts college with a degree in Art History.She makes well over $100,000 a year. She never had a career that had anything to do with Art History either.

That would be my story as well, except that my degree is in Literature.

What I liked about the last real college education I had was..nobody cared that I was 65 at the time...I was just part of the class miserably suffering through the same Stats II with a group of youngies..I was part of the group.

The negatives were those live,in-person Profs were so narrow minded I was not allowed to do research on synesthesia, (blank refusal!),.. or even of technological methods/results in a "multi cultural" class, because the guardian for research papers said he would only accept research on a "bi-racial" class ...that was his cultural Southern outlook. I bet an online professor in a more progressive state would have been open to both of those topics

Then I read online a lot about the new research on older brains, and our potential.

Yep, I'm much older now, but I have tremendous hope and optimism for online college educations for people studying everywhere, with perhaps improved local community support.People contact.

I'm going to look for an online class on Chinese History as soon as DH, post surgery, has studied how to get out of bed. (That class is Post-Surgery-Broken Ribs-Arm-and Kneecap 101)

I found it frustrating that I self tought myself as much as I did in college. While I understand that learning to teach yourself is a good skill to have, and can be part of the college experience, in several of my courses it was done because the instructor was not able to accurately instruct or was simply reading from the book. For one course, my roommate and I finally stopped going to the lectures and just read and did problems on our own.

AmericanIdle wrote:I find the (unstated but implied) notion that I bring no actual value to the students by being in the classroom both amusing and, at the same time, quite insulting.

You're being pretty thin-skinned. I don't think you could reasonably take exception to the notion that you bring no value to some students, and marginal value to others. I think that "sufficiently motivated" is most of what such students must bring to the table, with the remainder being "sufficiently able". I also think there will never be a flood of such students, but when you add them up across the world there are many.

My younger son is an example. He's 16 and has already learned far more than enough math to fulfill an undergraduate math major at UC Berkeley for example. Only about 3/4 of the requirements if you consider more serious places like Harvard or Princeton or Cambridge. Unusual, but I'm sure there are many more like him around. Did he do it on his own? No, not without help. He's read vast amounts online, had advice from various people, studied out of quite a few books (out of a choice selected by others), and he's audited classes at local colleges.

Plus he's had my invaluable guidance on what he should do if he's interested in particular things. But, hey, I know only what I read on the internet.

The clear future is that all knowledge is going to be out there for free. Likely, much packaging and teaching of that knowledge will be available for free for those who are sufficiently skilled and motivated to take it. Stuff that is packaged and processed will cost. But it won't continue to cost the kind of money it has been costing. So if I were you I'd be very afraid for my job -- it will get harder and become less remunerative over the next ten years. You'll have to change if you want to bring much actual value to your students of the future.

IMO it's a complete waste of education dollars K-12 if we're just going to have American college students studying libeeral arts, while we need to increase H1-B visas to fill the jobs in healthcare, tech, and sciences.

I keep seeing stuff like this. The thing is that not everyone has the same talents and interests. Not everyone is capable of doing college level work in the science and technical fields. Some of those may be capable of doing college level work in non-science fields. Others may not need to be in academic 4 year college at all.

I guess my biggest pet peeve about education is this constant drumbeat that everyone needs to get a 4 year degree, preferably in science or math or a technical field.

I'm all for everyone having the opportunity to do so -- if so inclined -- and having the ability to do so in a way that won't result in massive student loans.

However, not everyone is capable of getting a 4 year degree in such a subject or might be capable but mediocre or uninterested. The world does need people who major in English or history or psychology or art history, etc. And if that is where your talents are and that is what you are interested in - then far better to major in that than in a field where you either won't succeed or will hate the work.

And, frankly, for most areas of work a 4 year college degree is unnecessary. And, I think we do a disservice to the majority of people in the US to constantly push it for everyone.

There is nothing wrong with someone choosing to repair automobiles, or be a plumber or a carpenter, or be a hairdresser or cook. In fact, this country would be a pretty sad place if no one wanted to do those things. And none of those require a 4 year degree. They do require training. I would like to see us spend more time helping and encouraging kids to go into fields they enjoy and can earn a living in even if those fields don't require a 4 year degree.

I can think of NO subject taught in college currently that a sufficiently motivated person could not learn on their own at least to the level equivalent of a BS of BA degree, by purchasing used text books, reading online articles, working problems on their own, etc.

I would like to see us spend more time helping and encouraging kids to go into fields they enjoy and can earn a living in even if those fields don't require a 4 year degree.

I was pushed to be an electrical engineer. It took only one semester of semiconductor physics and circuit design to realize that it would be a nightmare for me. Over the objections that I would never earn as much in the field I choose, I went for what was enjoyable and I for which I had a talent.

The result is that I actually have had a higher salary, and the one pushing me the hardest found out that money wasn't sufficient to keep them in the field they didn't like.

The clear future is that all knowledge is going to be out there for free. Likely, much packaging and teaching of that knowledge will be available for free for those who are sufficiently skilled and motivated to take it. Stuff that is packaged and processed will cost. But it won't continue to cost the kind of money it has been costing. So if I were you I'd be very afraid for my job -- it will get harder and become less remunerative over the next ten years. You'll have to change if you want to bring much actual value to your students of the future.

-IGU-

The information is out there, now! SO is the garbage. And a lot more is required than just information. OK, a sufficiently motivated person, with sufficient aptitude, and appropriate guidance ( to separate the gems from the glass) can achieve the information of the BA/BS. But who would hire such a braggart? What have they shown they can do? How do they interact with the teams that make up the modern work place? Even so, at best, this takes care of the exceptional 1%.

There is a whole history and philosophy regarding what has gone before.

And please do not think that I do not know of what I speak. I did attend a top tech. school. The fields I that have worked in did not exist when I attended, but I knew what to do ( or how to find out what to do)to pick up the new information, techniques, methods, and organizational processes.

It's amazing how many people don't realize the following: education is free. People only charge if you want a degree. Whether online or in-person, its very likely that you can audit courses of your choosing free or maybe for a nominal fee at a local university in the study area of your choosing. Of course the in-person convenience depends on where you live, but it's a great underutilized option in our society. In my opinion, it shows that people really are far more interested in having a degree than in having an education.

Your original statement inferred that advanced musical abilities could only be acquired through formal college education. My point is there are plenty of successful musicians who did quite well without college and even others who had little formal training at all.

Your original statement inferred that advanced musical abilities could only be acquired through formal college education.

I was responding to a poster who claimed it could be learned out of a book, which is ridiculous for music or any other creative field.

My point is there are plenty of successful musicians who did quite well without college and even others who had little formal training at all.

Not true, where jazz musicians are concerned (which is what I specified). 60 or 80 years ago it was true, but they're all dead and the standards have been raised since then. Louis Armstrong wouldn't be able to get a job today playing as he did then.

Not true, where jazz musicians are concerned (which is what I specified). 60 or 80 years ago it was true, but they're all dead and the standards have been raised since then. Louis Armstrong wouldn't be able to get a job today playing as he did then.

...and most who study music in college are unable to maintain a career in that field either.

My daughter went to a very large NY City University for two years. She hated it. There was little to no interaction with her professors.She stayed for two years and then was accepted as a transfer student to a small liberal arts college where there was one professor for 7 students. She flourished in that environment. Of course, she is also extremely ambitious which counts for alot.My DH went to city and state colleges (relatively inexpensive) but he was very ambitious and did very well career wise.Obviously a key factor is both my daughters and their father are very hard working ambitious people.

That seems backwards to me. It is the ambitious students that can thrive in large university classrooms because they don't need individual attention.

There is nothing wrong with someone choosing to repair automobiles, or be a plumber or a carpenter, or be a hairdresser or cook.

Absolutely - I'm taking a beginner's plumbing class now - my biggest complaint is it's not hands-on and we're basically learning from a book - I thought it would be hands-on when I signed up.

But the reality is college admissions is up - there are more new jobs in "white collar" type fields than blue collar. And the old idea of college being a place "to find yourself" was something the very wealthy created back when children of wealthy people were just about the only ones going to college. I don't know that anyone ever dreamed about working on an automobile factor line - people did it because it paid well. And the early days of tech where anyone with an interest could get a tech job are for the most part over - it's matured enough that certain levels of education are expected for entry-level jobs.

I may like sitting on my butt watching TV all day. It doesn't mean I can get one of the few jobs of being a TV critic - and it doesn't mean it's up to society to find a way to make it possible for me to create a living sitting on my butt watching TV all day.

Yes we do need plumbers and carpenters - but they don't need to spend money taking expensive college courses - and they'd be better off not being weight down by student loan debt from unnecessary college courses. And we also need healthcare workers and tech/science workers - and therefore for people who want white-collar jobs we should be encouraging they go into those fields by using incentives. The only entity being helped by many students taking expensive college classes they do not need is the higher ed industry.

Yes we do need plumbers and carpenters - but they don't need to spend money taking expensive college courses - and they'd be better off not being weight down by student loan debt from unnecessary college courses.

While they don't need a big four year degree, there are often some community college courses that can help them in matters like basic accounting or classes about running a small business. Night school courses can offer information that they aren't always going to get from hands-on experience or advice from mentors. So a couple of classes at night aren't going to cost them a lot of money, and can help them.

And if, later, they decide they want a BA, simply because they like the idea of being well-educated, they can go the night school and on-line route.

Also? There are a lot of healthcare and tech jobs that don't require a four year degree. And, (a further point) while there is need for healthcare and science and tech workers, there is also a danger in pushing people to enter that field. Engineering is an example of what can happen. If there aren't enough engineers to fill the positions available, kids will be pushed to enter the engineering field (which means an expensive four year degree) and will agree because the salaries are high. Then, five or six years down the road, there will be a lot of engineers, and there aren't enough jobs available, and the newest graduates will scramble to find any job at all, in any field, in order to pay off the student loans.

So now, since there are too many engineers, kids decide to enter some other field, and after a few years there are engineering jobs going begging, so lots of kids decide to major in engineering because there is a need for engineers, and the cycle runs on and on. Pushing someone to enter a particular field just because there are jobs currently available can lead to personal disasters as students realize there just aren't any jobs available. The legal community is another example. Kids go to law school because the salaries at the top look great. Then they graduate, and realize that these salaries at the top are limited to a very small proportion of the elite graduates. The rest of the kids are faced with giant loans and no way to pay them. And yet people point to the high salaries as an indication that there is a need for more lawyers.

>>>>I find the (unstated but implied) notion that I bring no actual value to the students by being in the classroom both amusing and, at the same time, quite insulting.<<<<

I certainly did not mean to insult you. You seem to have also interpreted my statements in a manner they were not intended. I did not say that you brought no actual value to the students, nor did I imply it.

I did say that a motivated person could learn the material to the level that would be equivalent to a BS and or BA degree from most schools. (And I stand by that statement.) Take a look at how you and your department assign a grade in a course. Would a student pass that knew only the information in the text book used? I would suggest the answer is almost always yes.

I did say that the information is available for consumption by a "sufficiently motivated person" elsewhere. Which it is. The number of such people is astonishingly small. As a college faculty member as well, I am only speaking from experience.

I don't think it has anything to do with that. My favorite subject in high school was always history (and english) but in school I studied Business. I think history is something that is more fun to learn on your own because you can just study the things you're interested in (although it's harder to get an overall perspective this way - it's very easy to get too specialized). And literature - it's pretty easy to read fiction whenever you want. But learning finance, economics, productions management and other such things works well in a class room environment. Also, I had to do far more writing in business school (and give presentations) then many of my friends in other disciplines.

I've been obsessed with these history podcasts lately (Hardcore History - the Wrath of the Khans is fascinating and free! and I've also been making my way through the History of Rome someone suggested on this board a while back), but I'm definately going to try those open yale courses as well.

>>>Your original statement inferred that advanced musical abilities could only be acquired through formal college education.

I was responding to a poster who claimed it could be learned out of a book, which is ridiculous for music or any other creative field. <<<

If it was me then you missed the point, and I do not recall anyone says outside a book.

>>>My point is there are plenty of successful musicians who did quite well without college and even others who had little formal training at all.

Not true, where jazz musicians are concerned (which is what I specified). 60 or 80 years ago it was true, but they're all dead and the standards have been raised since then. Louis Armstrong wouldn't be able to get a job today playing as he did then. <<<<

This is funny. And totally misses the point. Because someone offers a degree in a field does NOT mean that a degree is the only way to learn the skill, information, etc. It is just the only way to earn the degree. The fact that OTHERS have decided that they will only hire people with said degree does not mean that you can not perform well in the position without said degree only that you will not be offered the position in the first place. And we can argue the wisdom of that behavior.

If employers started requiring that you wear a yellow feather in your cap to be hired, then there would be a run on yellow feathers. That has nothing to do with performing well in a position.

Most if not all subjects taught in schools were FIRST jobs, then degrees. There were great mathematicians before there was a math degree, great engineers before there was an engineering degree, etc. etc.

I did say that a motivated person could learn the material to the level that would be equivalent to a BS and or BA degree from most schools. (And I stand by that statement.) Take a look at how you and your department assign a grade in a course. Would a student pass that knew only the information in the text book used? I would suggest the answer is almost always yes.

1. Most of my upper div math classes, while they technically HAD a book, didn't use them - except maybe for a couple homework problems. Teachers taught from their own notes, hand wrote homework assignments and tests (yes, really - only a couple used a computer - and I graduated in 2009).

2. Maybe you or someone you know could learn abstract algebra and real analysis from a textbook alone, but I sure as heck couldn't.

Yes we do need plumbers and carpenters - but they don't need to spend money taking expensive college courses - and they'd be better off not being weight down by student loan debt from unnecessary college courses. And we also need healthcare workers and tech/science workers - and therefore for people who want white-collar jobs we should be encouraging they go into those fields by using incentives. The only entity being helped by many students taking expensive college classes they do not need is the higher ed industry.

I've been looking into a lot of this lately. My daughter is 16 and has zero interest in doing a 4 year academic college degree. She does not want to do it and it doesn't mesh well with her talents.

We've doing some looking into career planning and so I've been looking into a lot of these non-bachelor's degree courses.

Like a lot of thing there are many options out there.

For example - to be a hairdresser once can go and do a 1 year program at the community college for a few thousand dollars, living at home.

Or you could do the same hair dressing program but take a few academic courses and get an Associates in Applied Science in 2 years for twice as much money.

Or you could go do a 1 year program at one of the for profit schools and pay $18,000.

Another one - Culinary arts

You can do a 1 year program and just learn cooking and a little restaurant management at the community college for a few thousand dollars.

Or you can do a 2 year program and take some academic courses and a few more restaurant management courses and get an AAS degree in 2 years for twice as much.

Or you might want to transfer to a 4 year school for a BA in hotel and restaurant management and so you take fewer culinary arts courses and more academic programs and then plan to transfer to the 4 year school.

Or you could go to one of the for profit culinary arts school for $25,000 a year (not including room and board).

There is a lot of range of expenses out there. For most people, by the way, the community college program will be just fine and will cost well under $10,000 in total even for a 2 year program.

There is nothing wrong with someone choosing to repair automobiles, or be a plumber or a carpenter, or be a hairdresser or cook.

Although my husband and grown children all have college degrees I totally agree with you. One of my former co-workers is probably the highest paid administrative assistant in the bank that she works for. She's been there over 30 years and she's always been as smart or smarter than the executives she works for.My former hairdresser is a manager and hairdresser at Vidal Sassoon in Manhattan. She also makes a very good salary and is very good at her job.Plumbers and carpenters make a fortune in our area. It's actually hard to get one to show up if you need one as they are always busy.I myself do not have a college degree but made $20 an hour as a temp admin. assistant in a bank and that was 12 years ago.

One of my former co-workers is probably the highest paid administrative assistant in the bank that she works for. She's been there over 30 years and she's always been as smart or smarter than the executives she works for.

Thank you for recommending this post to our Best of feature.You will be able to recommend 7 more posts today. (explain this)

There is nothing wrong with someone choosing to repair automobiles, or be a plumber or a carpenter, or be a hairdresser or cook.

True. I agree there's nothing "wrong" with those choices.

However they are limiting. You can only work at one place at a time so to make more money you have to either raise your prices (competition limits that) or work more hours and need for sleep (yours & customers) limits that.

Of course those limitations can be gotten around buy hiring workers which leads to payrolls etc. Before you go too far down that road you're right back to needing those college courses.

One of my daughters majored in psychology. She got a late start and I groaned, thinking she would be 35 before she had a career. Her undergraduate degree (which is btw a Bachelors in Science) was paid because she was an excellent student in Georgia under the Hope Scholarship (which has been reduced in recent years). She decided to get a Masters in Conflict Resolution for which I helped pay. She has been working for a year in a law office as a document reviewer, which apparently is also what many new lawyers have to do. She is excellent at it because she did a great deal of research as a graduate assistant. It also doesn't hurt that she is extremely intelligent.

You can't ever tell what job someone might get regardless of their major. I think it is more important to have good grades and learn a skill while you are in school.

And I wholeheartedly agree that not everyone needs to go to a 4 year college. Technical schools provide careers for plenty of people.

However they are limiting. You can only work at one place at a time so to make more money you have to either raise your prices (competition limits that) or work more hours and need for sleep (yours & customers) limits that.

I don't really disagree, but lots of fields - even those that require degrees are limiting in one way or another.

One of things that bothers me about so much discussion about college (not really talking about your post just using it as a springboard) is that we all like to act like everyone has the same abilities and interests.

It is sort of like saying to everyone - do you want to be an engineer or do you want to be a hairdresser or a carpenter? And then thinking that -- of course -- any rational person would choose to be an engineer.

The reality is that not everyone is cut out for every field. I did really well a thousand years ago in law school, but I'm pretty sure I would have flunked out of engineering school.

And - truthfully - not everyone is capable of doing college level academic work, but may well be capable to doing lots of other work that is quite valuable to society.

And there are people who are capable of doing college level work but don't want to do that kind of work. My daughter could get a college degree if we she really wanted one. But she does not have an interest in doing academic work that a traditional college degree would require.

When she was early in high school this caused her a lot of angst because the message from the high school was basically - if you don't go to college then you are a dumb, failure. That isn't what they said exactly - but it was the message that she received and, frankly, I think it was pretty much the message they were not so subtly sending. There is really something terribly wrong with our educational system when we send kids that message when you also recognize that the majority of kids won't receive a 4 year degree and don't really need a 4 year degree.

Maybe this is different, but DS is in plumbing, doing med gas installation, and his future seems more open than mine was as a social worker (not that SW is an especially lucrative field). He can go to several levels past what he's licensed for now,(supervision, inspection) and I doubt he'll ever see the inside of a residential home.

He can get classroom knowledge now, as long as it hooks into practical experience. Without that hook, things didn't work out so well.

I don't see him ever going back for a four year degree, although he'd go back for further licencing.

If you're looking for two year degrees, I would recommend DRT's (radiological tech) to many young people. Average salary is something like 50-60k, starting in the 40's. For a two year degree, that's pretty decent and anything in the medical field is pretty easy to find a job, move, etc...

There is nothing wrong with someone choosing to repair automobiles, or be a plumber or a carpenter, or be a hairdresser or cook.

My friend has an IQ in the top 1% so I think that yes, she is probably as smart or smarter than her boss. Most of the people I worked for were graduates of good schools and I kept up with them every step of the way. You had to have a brain to work for someone who graduated Columbia and Wharton.

However they are limiting. You can only work at one place at a time so to make more money you have to either raise your prices (competition limits that) or work more hours and need for sleep (yours & customers) limits that.

I don't know where you live but your comment just does not hold true for NY City. A good hairdresser commands at least $150 for a haircut. Good plumbers and contractors are worth their weight in gold.Appliance repairman get paid like investment bankers in my honest opinion. I asked one of them from Manhattan to come to take a look at my Bosch microwave and he said I would have to pay him $225 just for him to make the trip!My husband has an MBA in Finance and has been laid off three times starting at the age of 52 years old. In banking you are put out to pasture early in the game. Because he is so hard working, ambitious and well liked he was able to find work. He just resigned from his job this week and he will be turning 66 soon.

Mine did too. She worked for the founder of cognitive therapy in Philadelphia, PA. She had 3 careers by the age of 25. She ended up going to law school and is now a lawyer.She is also very intelligent. The key to success is hard work andambition no matter what you choose to do.Our local supermarket employs a young man who is mentally challenged. He is in charge of organizing the shopping carts and helping out others. A harder working person I have yet to meet. He is totally focused on his job although he will take a second or two to say Hi to me when I see him. He is an inspiration to us all.

I don't know where you live but your comment just does not hold true for NY City. A good hairdresser commands at least $150 for a haircut.

When I read comments like this I always wonder about the folks that work as waitstaff, maids, bank clerks, retail clerks, etc. Where do they get their hair cut or do they just go around with bad hair cuts?

Appliance repairman get paid like investment bankers in my honest opinion. I asked one of them from Manhattan to come to take a look at my Bosch microwave and he said I would have to pay him $225 just for him to make the trip!

How long would it take him to get to your place? Would he have to pay for parking?

Maybe this is different, but DS is in plumbing, doing med gas installation, and his future seems more open than mine was as a social worker (not that SW is an especially lucrative field). He can go to several levels past what he's licensed for now,(supervision, inspection) and I doubt he'll ever see the inside of a residential home. Exactly.

People hear "building trades" and they think a guy putting up a shed. The trades offer many paths for advancement. But to advance you DO have to train and skill yourself up - whether to get advanced training to do complex installs needing special inspections, or to grow yourself from a hands-on-guy to a PM. It does require advanced education of some kind, self-taught or other.

I don't know where you live but your comment just does not hold true for NY City. A good hairdresser commands at least $150 for a haircut.

When I read comments like this I always wonder about the folks that work as waitstaff, maids, bank clerks, retail clerks, etc. Where do they get their hair cut or do they just go around with bad hair cuts?

They probably go to someone cheaper - there are definately cheaper options hello supercuts! - but 100+ for a cut and color is pretty common even in Arkansas. But you can also go to the hair school and get it done for maybe 30. The thing about hairdressing as a career is that you will likely have to deal with all the hassles of working for yourself, which can be both a blessing and a curse.

At DS's job, there seems to be a divide between guys who have been doing the same job for years and are doing the minimum (they do a good job, but that's all they want to do) and guys who are looking for the next company-paid class or offer to go on jobs they don't know well, to gain broader experience. There's a range of education levels and ages on both sides.

The ones who do *just* their job may get left behind, as the technology seems to change faster that I would have thought.

People hear "building trades" and they think a guy putting up a shed. So true...or a guy on a roof with a hammer.

DS sends me pics now and then of what he's working on. A complex array of copper lines all angled just so has a certain beauty to it, I have to admit :-)

I don't really disagree, but lots of fields - even those that require degrees are limiting in one way or another.

One of things that bothers me about so much discussion about college (not really talking about your post just using it as a springboard) is that we all like to act like everyone has the same abilities and interests.

It is sort of like saying to everyone - do you want to be an engineer or do you want to be a hairdresser or a carpenter? And then thinking that -- of course -- any rational person would choose to be an engineer.

The reality is that not everyone is cut out for every field. I did really well a thousand years ago in law school, but I'm pretty sure I would have flunked out of engineering school.

And - truthfully - not everyone is capable of doing college level academic work, but may well be capable to doing lots of other work that is quite valuable to society.

And there are people who are capable of doing college level work but don't want to do that kind of work. My daughter could get a college degree if we she really wanted one. But she does not have an interest in doing academic work that a traditional college degree would require.

When she was early in high school this caused her a lot of angst because the message from the high school was basically - if you don't go to college then you are a dumb, failure. That isn't what they said exactly - but it was the message that she received and, frankly, I think it was pretty much the message they were not so subtly sending. There is really something terribly wrong with our educational system when we send kids that message when you also recognize that the majority of kids won't receive a 4 year degree and don't really need a 4 year degree.

All true, but supply and demand do determine what people can make. Engineers will remain in demand because it is hard, and not fun. As long as people make informed choices, taking into account the costs of obtaining a degree as well as the likely future job choices that would allow one to pay back the debt taken on to acquire it, then that's fine. But that's a lot to ask of an 18-year-old, and I suspect that most college kids choose their courses of study because 'it's easier' and/or 'it's fun', and only later realize that they are fighting many other job-seekers for lower-paying jobs than those who studied engineering or technology. But salary and happiness are not the same, and those that end up happier and fulfilled are the winners, and those that end up experiencing buyer's remorse have lost. Both occur across the educational spectrum; I know engineers that went back to school to choose another path. I think it's important to ensure that everyone spending enormous amounts of money on education really understand the consequences.

Complete online or self directed education means you are learning in a vacuum. You need to be in the presence of other people in a learning environment in order to get nuances, find out what you don't know, and be given help and advice when you don't realize you need help and advice. A person alone without that support gets a poor education.

I'm currently completing my degree through online courses at a traditional brick and mortar school. I have been amazed at how interactive the classes have been. We have discussion boards, write papers, get feedback and take our quizzes all online.

Tha discussion boards have been awesome. We have so much more participation online than we tend to get in the actual classroom. Or at least that has been my experience. In traditional classrooms it always seemed like the same 3 or 4 people were always the ones who particiapted in the discussions, while everyone else just kind of stayed quiet and took notes. Online, without having to actually speak up in a classroom, I've seen pretty much everyone who is taking the course take part in the discussions.

The most exciting part is that I'm done, I'll have a nice traditional diploma, from a respected university, to hang on my wall.

A complex array of copper lines all angled just so has a certain beauty to it, I have to admit :-)I agree! My favorite part of my job is being on job sites when things are being roughed-in. OK, I'm an Excel geek and like the number-crunching part of it a lot too. But nothing beats seeing things go in.

Engineers will remain in demand because it is hard, and not fun.Speak for yourself, sir. I got an engineering degree because I think it is way, WAY fun. I am lucky enough that I both love what I do and am paid well for it. Can't imagine doing anything I would like more, except being a cook.

Speak for yourself, sir. I got an engineering degree because I think it is way, WAY fun. I am lucky enough that I both love what I do and am paid well for it. Can't imagine doing anything I would like more, except being a cook.

My brother was pushed into engineering (when the family went to the beach he liked to build roads and towns in the sand, so everyone thought he would love engineering). But by the end of his five years of study (he was in a program that offered both a BA and an MA) he knew he didn't like it. He lived with it for a while, but he finally went back to school and got an MA in landscape architecture. He loved it. It was exactly the right field for him, and he has done very well. But one of the advantages he has is that engineering degree. So even though it was the wrong field, it has added to his value in his work.

My dad started as a metallurgist (pushed into it by his dad) and HATED it. He switched to meteorology, and has loved it ever since. He was doing weather forecasts for my grandmas friends when he was 7, and has since had a long and interesting career in the field doing everything from agronomy and soil moisture modeling to hurricane modeling to studying the migration of Saharan dust in the jet stream.

You have to know what you like and what you don't. I think civil engineering is AWESOME, but would rather stab myself in the leg than do EE.

Seriously I have at least one niece who would disagree with you about the "fun" part and mean it. My family (extended) has a disroportionate number of engineers in it and I can't remember any of them really complaining about the work being a drag and a couple of them are downright geeky in their delight.

Wow. My uncle was a metallurgist. This is only the second time that I have come across another person with that title/job. He actually ended up teaching metallurgy at one of the top colleges in the country.I think by now he must be retired.

I live in a small town, in a rural area of Ontario. My local hairdresser gives me a great cut every month. I even get compliments, and questions about who cuts my hair when I am visiting some nearby larger cities. The cost is $12.00. Also, it is fun to go there -- kind of like something out of the movie Steel Magnolias.

Living in a small town works for me, but I understand that many people would want all the advantages that NY city has to offer, and when I was younger, I liked living in Toronto, and going to the Royal Ontario Museum exhibits on Thurs. evenings after 5 p.m. because it was free. I got to see some great exhibits. Now I can take the train if I want.

Great discussion. I am finishing up an Associates degree in IT Networking at the local community college. (I also work full time and am a single parent, I am also 53).

The community college is very affordable and for the most part I have found the instructors and classes very good. I know an associates degree is not much these days but I feel like I have worked my tail off to earn it. I already work in the IT industry and my employer seems pleased with the effort.

For my final class I opted for a web based class (all the other classes were in the classroom). The web class is good, however it is extremely demanding with three times the homework. I have heard others remark about this same comment regarding web based classes, that they make you work much harder to insure that you are not slacking off.

For my money the community colleges are a great bargain, with costs about 1/4 of what the local 4 year colleges were charging.

Speak for yourself, sir. I got an engineering degree because I think it is way, WAY fun.

I wasn't speaking so much for myself as for the reasons many give for not going into engineering. For any discipline or course of study, there are those who do it because it is a passion. Most people don't know what their passion is at 18, and some don't at 30. I was simply pointing out that for many college freshman who don't yet know what they want, the idea of studying calculus, fluids, circuits and thermodynamics (not to mention all the courses with lab reports) is not particularly appealing, especially since it tends to cut down on the time one has for socializing.

I liked thermodynamics about as much as civil procedure; both were necessary but not particularly enjoyable. I like what I do now, and consider myself lucky in that regard. But at today's tuition rates, I don't think current college students have a much smaller margin for error, in terms of getting an affordable degree leading to a job they enjoy that allows them to pay off the debt.

But at today's tuition rates, I don't think current college students have a much smaller margin for error, in terms of getting an affordable degree leading to a job they enjoy that allows them to pay off the debt.

Sorry, I meant to say I think current college students have a much smaller margin for error not "I don't think current....". Poor editing on my part.

However they are limiting. You can only work at one place at a time so to make more money you have to either raise your prices (competition limits that) or work more hours and need for sleep (yours & customers) limits that.

I don't know where you live but your comment just does not hold true for NY City. A good hairdresser commands at least $150 for a haircut. Good plumbers and contractors are worth their weight in gold.

Yes, the good hairdresser may command $150 in NYC, but can s/he command $300 if the other just as good hairdressers are charging $150?

Competition limits prices!

Of course the appliance repairman wanted $225 to make the trip. The time he spent driving to you would be time he could be working on someone else's appliance. Why should he fight traffic for free?

>>>Engineers will remain in demand because it is hard, and not fun.<<<

No it is a lot of fun. I have traveled the world, designed new materials and consumer packaging (which I still have the pleasure of seeing on store shelves), had the opportunity to manage a research lab, spent quality time in a postconsumer plastic recycling center, met a ton of cool people, get the references on the "Big Bang Theory", now work with engineers in training and spend time "playing" I mean researching in my lab.

Of course not everyone would find it fun, but then I have never considered sitting all morning in the cold waiting for a deer to walk out of the bushes fun, other consider it the thrill of a lifetime.

When I read comments like this I always wonder about the folks that work as waitstaff, maids, bank clerks, retail clerks, etc. Where do they get their hair cut or do they just go around with bad hair cuts?

I started cutting my own hair when local prices went up to $8 many years ago. I suspect there are lots of barbers in NYC who will cut your hair for less than $150; it just depends on which barbershop you want to be seen in. ;-)

Brooklyn1948 is looking at the plumber's bill from the point of view of a customer wanting to pay as little as possible, the plumber is looking at it from the other side. ;-)

Dunno - I think although many are scared of math or labs, many of us honestly like these things. And probably enough of us do it in HS to get an idea of what it is like.

When I was an art history major as an undergrad, I took several chemistry classes (including organic chemistry) and some advanced physics for "fun." Both the art history degree and the science add-ons were a lot of work, but both a lot of fun as well. When I decided to go back and get a CE MS later, it was entirely for my own enjoyment - I have never worked as a structural engineer (although I do work with them a lot).

I also recognize that many may find marketing or statistics "fun" but I would take seismic analysis 10x over *(my very least favorite CE class, and perhaps least favorite class ever) than ever take a class in anything remotely related to either of those subjects.

Living in a small town works for me, but I understand that many people would want all the advantages that NY city has to offer

We grew up in a suburb 40 miles southeast of NY City. There is little work to be had in the suburbs so everyone who wanted a career, especially one in finance had to go to the city.We will be moving to a small town in a few months. I welcome the change. Big city life no long appeals to us and as retirees we can no longer afford to stay.

Yes, the good hairdresser may command $150 in NYC, but can s/he command $300 if the other just as good hairdressers are charging $150?

What's your point? The hairdresser is making a good living working for Vidal Sassoon Salon. As for the appliance repairman, maybe he was just trying to rip me off.I had two repairmen look at two appliances that I paid alot of money for and were less than 3 years old. One guy told me that it would cost me $500 to fix the Bosch microwave so I should just buy a new one.The second repairman told me that it would cost $500 to replace the door on the Bosch oven. Seriously? In my next house I will stick to Maytag or GE. Never had a problem with those appliances.

Yes, the good hairdresser may command $150 in NYC, but can s/he command $300 if the other just as good hairdressers are charging $150?

What's your point?

My point is still the same:Competition limits prices!

As for the appliance repairman, maybe he was just trying to rip me off.

Doubtful. If he was trying to rip you off he wouldn't have told you about the travel time costs/price until he got there.

I had two repairmen look at two appliances that I paid alot of money for and were less than 3 years old. One guy told me that it would cost me $500 to fix the Bosch microwave so I should just buy a new one.The second repairman told me that it would cost $500 to replace the door on the Bosch oven. Seriously?

Seriously!

The cost of the door (which he'll probably have to order) plus the time to take your Bosch oven apart and install the new door plus his travel time to your place twice (once to pick it up and once to deliver the repaired oven) seems to be about $500 in the NYC area.

PS And the guy was right. Nowadays it's almost always cheaper to buy a new appliance than repair the old one.

One of the reasons you don't often see used appliances in Goodwill stores is that you can buy a new one for about what it would cost them (even with their low employee costs) to repair and sell you a used one.

The thing about hairdressing as a career is that you will likely have to deal with all the hassles of working for yourself, which can be both a blessing and a curse.

Yes, iirc the hairdresser rents the chair from the salon, buys their own supplies and has all the headaches of any other small business person.

The upside is they can make more money than working for someone else.

Different salons have different setups. A lot of them have chair rentals but it varies.

It may seem surprising to call a reality TV show educational, but I learned a lot about the hairdressing business by watching the TV show, Tabatha's Salon Takeover (now called Tabatha Takes Over). The premise is that an experienced salon owner comes into a failing salon and gives the owner advice on how to fix the problems and make the salon successful. I'm sure there's a lot of exaggeration for TV, but the basic advice always seemed sound to me.

The second repairman told me that it would cost $500 to replace the door on the Bosch oven. Seriously?

Is the door Stainless steel?

In looking for a dishwasher, the search showed the cost for a handle for a stainless steel door. It was well over $100. I can believe with service call charges that replacement of an oven door could be $500.

Replacing an oven door doesn't sound that difficult, but it all depends on the model. Have you considered replacing it yourself?

Different salons have different setups. A lot of them have chair rentals but it varies.

Just curious, what are the other arrangements for an independent hairdresser working in someone else's salon?

I'm not an expert, but based on what I've seen on the TV show - some salons take a specific percentage of each service. That seems to be pretty common. There also seem to be some salons that work like co-ops. And some hairdressers are salaried.

Yes, iirc the hairdresser rents the chair from the salon, buys their own supplies and has all the headaches of any other small business person.

The upside is they can make more money than working for someone else.

I had the same hairdresser for a number of years (actually the whole family went to him) until we moved and we talked a lot about the hairdressing business. When we first met he was renting a chair in a salon but after awhile he started his own shop.

His wife was a math teacher promoted to vice principal.

She had the college degree (and I think a masters) while he had been trained through apprenticeship in France.

But - his income as a hairdresser was more than twice what his wife made. I agree that the hairdressers at Great Clips aren't making that but those with a lot of talent and drive can do very well.

But - his income as a hairdresser was more than twice what his wife made.

Are you sure about that? The taxable income on his annual tax form might be higher - but if you factor in the health insurance, retirement benefit, vacation time, sick leave and any other bennies his wife, the VP earns - who's really making more for an hour of labor?

And what about job/business security? If the wife were in an accident, or had a medical illness that left her partially but not totally disabled, she could still do her job - what about if the same happened to him. Even if he owns his shop - hairdressers move shops all the time and usually call up their clients - many of whom follow the hairdresser rather than staying loyal to the salon.

Related anecdote - I graduated from a NJ State college back in the early 1980's. My Mom just recently found the cancelled checks from my tuition, housing and books from my freshman year and sent them to me. If this isn't an illustration of price inflation from them to now, I don't know what is. These are the exact $ amounts from the checks:

*This does not include food, because we did not have a "meal plan." We shopped and bought our own food, because we had the apartment. So even if food was another $1000 for the year, the entire first year tuition and food cost less than $3000. So given this, I can't even imagine what its like for families to pay $100,000+ for a college education. I also realize how lucky I was to finish a 4 year degree with no loans.

I can't even imagine what its like for families to pay $100,000+ for a college education.

Both my children graduated college 16-18 years ago. Tuition back then at a private college was 25,000 a year. I think I remember books being 1,000 a year. Private colleges are running $50,000 a year now.I think it's a good deal for a young person to start out going to a community college for two years. My husband started out that way. He never went to private schools, just city and state. He was drafted in 1968 and when he became a civilian again, the army paid for his education.My children agonize over how they will manage to educate their children 16 years from now. Well, where there's a will, there's a way.

I can't even imagine what its like for families to pay $100,000+ for a college education.

Some people start saving from when their children are very young, so compounding over time can really help here. Some people put education higher on their priority list than other things, and so allocate money towards that education before a lot of other things. Some people choose to pay some portion of their kids' education (i.e. only pay up to what a state school would cost, only pay tuition and the child commutes, etc.), so there are definitely different approaches to this.

As this is the LBYM board, I think people here understand that we all have different priorities and budgets, and make choices that are appropriate to our own lives. Where I might put education high on the list, someone else might put it lower based on their own priorities. Neither option is right or wrong. They are just different.

I can say, however, that I don't feel like I missed anything by not taking many vacations or by allocating a large chunk toward the kids' college, but that was our choice down to the fact that I would work an extra year or two before retiring if it means that my kids will leave college without any school loans.

My children agonize over how they will manage to educate their children 16 years from now. Well, where there's a will, there's a way.

I think people also sometimes focus on that giant number that you need for college, and panic that it is hard to reach so might get stuck and feel defeated before they start. I think it's easier, and certainly less stressful, to just focus on what you can put aside now, preferably when the kids are little, so that you have something when they reach college age. And my bet is that that will be more than you will have imagined.

Something that we found really helped was to just reallocate money we were already spending on the kids towards college savings. So when they went off formula, that went into college savings. When they were out of diapers, that went into college savings. But the biggest item by far was when they started school and stopped daycare, and that went into the college savings. All of that helped tremendously in putting my twins through the colleges of their choice without them having to take out loans, and without it making us feel pinched since this was money we were already spending from when they were infants, so it was already in the budget.

I can't even imagine what its like for families to pay $100,000+ for a college education.

Both my children graduated college 16-18 years ago. Tuition back then at a private college was 25,000 a year. I think I remember books being 1,000 a year.

So, how did it work out for you? Assuming your children graduated in 4 years, the total cost seems to be $104,000 for each of their degrees. Note that the $100,000+ is for the entire period (4 years for most).

"For the 2010–11 academic year, annual current dollar prices for undergraduate tuition, room, and board were estimated to be $13,600 at public institutions, $36,300 at private not-for-profit institutions, and $23,500 at private for-profit institutions."Source: http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=76

His wife has the teacher's benefits. In my state, you can't get better benefits. Our teacher's get health benefits and I'm pretty sure they still don't contribute premiums - there was a push to get them to contribute 10% but I'm pretty sure that didn't get through in the last negotiations. In addition if you work 10 years and retire, they pay you the average of your last three years salary for the rest of your life as a pension. That's my tax dollars paying for their pension.

The hairdresser may make more money today, but he's not going to be wealthy when he can't work anymore - my father in law was a hairdresser in New York. He had a stroke in his mid-50's and now he's unable to work, declared bankruptcy and is on medicaid in an assisted living home.

I'd go with the teacher on that one. And if you decide to be a hairdresser, have a back up plan - savings or something you can fall back on in the event you do work at Great Clips or you find you can't work at all.

So, how did it work out for you? Assuming your children graduated in 4 years, the total cost seems to be $104,000 for each of their degrees. Note that the $100,000+ is for the entire period (4 years for most).

We took a new loan every year for each child. The payments were very high but my husband had a very good job. The very year that the first loan would have been paid off my husband lost his job. We had to sell our house to raise cash. We paid down the college loans with the equity that we had in the house which was pretty substantial. Other people have told us that we should have given the loans to our children to pay off. We refused. We told our children that their college education was a gift from us. We never renegged on that promise.They both have very successful careers. More importantly, they are good people,decent human beings. Who could ask for more. Our money was well spent.

I started cutting my own hair when local prices went up to $8 many years ago. I suspect there are lots of barbers in NYC who will cut your hair for less than $150; it just depends on which barbershop you want to be seen in. ;-)

When I retired, I started cutting my own hair (and stopped coloring it). When I moved to NYC to babysit my grandson, DD persuaded me to see her trainee hairdresser for some thing like $35 or $50. Alas, he had health problems and left the job. So I saw the next trainee, but he became a full-fledged pro charging $150.

While wandering Chelsea one day, I stumbled across a place that looked like a barbershop but gave women's haircuts for $14 (yes, way!). OK, not quite as good as the pricey cut, and no freshly laundered robe to put on in a changing room, no pricey hair products, no hand massage, no hour-long cut, and the ambiance was about like a cheap dive. BUt $14 + $3 tip--that gets me out of my 2-minute self-cut (grab a hank, cut, grab next hank, cut, stop when done...eh, curly hair is very forgiving ;-)

The advocates of online courses say that they can accomplish this with forum postings, so students grade each other, but having one bad, inexperienced writer critiquing another bad, inexperienced writer only goes so far - you really need someone with experience and teaching skill to do this.

Karen, I wish I could rec this 100 times! I see cases of plagiarism all the time where a student relied on another student to "proof" their work before they turned it in. The other student didn't catch the plagiarism so the first student got turned in for it.

I tell my students in remediation all the time: "Don't sutomatically assume that the person sitting next to you knows more than you do. They may be just as lost as you are. If you have questions, ask the instructor or TA."

We started saving for our kids college education, pretty much the day they were born. While we may not have it 100% funded by the time they are ready to enroll, we'll have at least part of it saved. We don't miss the vacations, and all the "stuff" either. More important for us to fund our kids education. If doing so means that the most I can do is sit in a backyard lawn chair and read a book for my vacation, than so be it. I did all the running around and vacation when I was single. Now, their needs are more important than mine/ours.

My sister is a CFA. She commanded a big salary after she finally passed the CFA test which she took several years in a row.

I will channel Kahuna here:

"She should have only taken the exam ONCE. Otherwise it is a waste of time. I only had to try once to pass the exam and my daughter (who is a successful lawyer) passed the State Bar on the first try. We did not have to pay any educational costs. Blah blah ..."

"She should have only taken the exam ONCE. Otherwise it is a waste of time. I only had to try once to pass the exam and my daughter (who is a successful lawyer) passed the State Bar on the first try. We did not have to pay any educational costs. Blah blah ..."

You forgot the rest of the speech, "After I became a Certified Financial Planner I was excellent at it. My record is far better than that of Warren Buffett, who I do not think is very good at buying stocks. I am now a Venture Capitalist."

That's what everybody should do: refuse to attend a university until they pay you to go there.

Nah. That would not work at the top schools. My daughter went to a small liberal arts college where nearly everyone she met was a trust fund baby. I got the shakes just trying to put her allowance in the bank every week and it wasn't that much either.My other daughter went to a less competitive college with normal people many were on financial aid. In theend, both did very well in their careers.

"She should have only taken the exam ONCE. Otherwise it is a waste of time. I only had to try once to pass the exam and my daughter (who is a successful lawyer) passed the State Bar on the first try. We did not have to pay any educational costs. Blah blah ..."

We cannot paint everyone with the same brush. Some people do not test well. My children's SAT's were nothing to write home about yet one of my kids has an IQ in the top 1% and the other is very intelligent also.

My sister made $300,000 a year. Nobody ever asked how many times she took the CFA test.

We cannot paint everyone with the same brush. Some people do not test well. My children's SAT's were nothing to write home about yet one of my kids has an IQ in the top 1% and the other is very intelligent also.

You aren't getting the joke. He was quoting a typical post from Kahuna all about how wonderful Kahuna is, and how much Kahuna admires himself. You seem to be taking our comments about him seriously.

"She should have only taken the exam ONCE. Otherwise it is a waste of time. I only had to try once to pass the exam and my daughter (who is a successful lawyer) passed the State Bar on the first try. We did not have to pay any educational costs. Blah blah ..."

Sorry Nancy. I am fairly new to this board. But Kahuna sounds very much like the very annoying Wall St. yuppies that surround me in this neighborhood.

Sorry Nancy. I am fairly new to this board. But Kahuna sounds very much like the very annoying Wall St. yuppies that surround me in this neighborhood.

Oh, you don't need to apologize, but I realized that you were taking our comments seriously, and I thought I should let you know what was going on. As you read more of his comments over a period of time you will learn just about every aspect of his life. I tried to tell him once that I thought it could be dangerous to air every aspect of his life on a message board, but he informed me that he was universally beloved in his city, and no one would ever harm him no matter where he was.

I was really thinking more of someone with poor anger management and impulse control skills showing up at his house with an AK-47, but I let the matter drop.

I tried to tell him once that I thought it could be dangerous to air every aspect of his life on a message board, but he informed me that he was universally beloved in his city, and no one would ever harm him no matter where he was.

He sounds exactly like someone who posts to the Brooklyn Heights Blog.He is the most annoying person in the world. The regular bloggers have told him pretty much to shut up about the fact that he brags that he lives on the BEST block in the Heights, that his wife is gorgeous, that his au pair is gorgeous, that his kids are gorgeous. The fact is thatnobody likes him at all. That's kind of sad.The word narcissist comes to mind too.

Our teacher's get health benefits and I'm pretty sure they still don't contribute premiums - there was a push to get them to contribute 10% but I'm pretty sure that didn't get through in the last negotiations. In addition if you work 10 years and retire, they pay you the average of your last three years salary for the rest of your life as a pension. That's my tax dollars paying for their pension.

In my state (MN), state workers get 1.7% for each year of service. So if they worked for just 10 years they would get just 15% of high-five as pension benefit. And that is only if they wait until age 66 to retire. If they retire earlier, the benefit is reduced proportinately.

So what state are you talking about? Are you sure that is how it works? Workers are fully vested in the pension plan after just 10 years of work? And can start claiming pension benefits immediately after leaving work, regardless of age?

I call BS.I dont think very many people really understand how pensions actually works.